COI Archbishop John Neill ON WAR and Green Party Dissenters?

by Thanx Wed Aug 01, 2007 09:34

John Gormley's adage is 'Politics are Perception', in fairness what it looks like is a party willing to 'trim'
for power and therefore discounting the very members who have given it its integrity.
That is sickening.

What does the Green Party want to attract the FG party laggers?, Boys in suits selling environment to
access power and mouthing empty words to achieve that power?
I do not think that the GP in coalition represents the Green party any longer and shall no longer support it.
Thanks to the undersigned for having conviction.

by me Wed Aug 01, 2007 09:39

Fair play to the Greens who signed this, but 80% of the membership voted to join this shameful government despite the continued use of Shannon by the US military.

Leave the Green Party if you have any sense. You can't "save" it...it's far too late for that.

by Jimmy O´T Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:45

Is it not the case that Cllr O Brolchain voted in favour of the deal with Fianna Fail and the sell out on Shannon?

who does he think he is fooling?

by MichaelY - iawm Wed Aug 01, 2007 13:19

Hi Jimmy,

Cllr O Brolchain, ex Galway Mayor, is not fooling anybody. He had signed the PANA/iawm election pledge, he was always, both personally and publicly, against the use of Shannon by US military and the CIA - at least that's what he always said in public. He was present, for example, in the recent anti-Airshow protest in Galway organised by the GAAW.
Now, outside the Mansion House, when asked, he said he was in two minds about this. And you're right , he voted for the deal.
However, give him the benefit of the doubt. There is the faint possibility that his left side of 'the mind' convinced his right side that he was wrong to vote for the militant tendency There is also the fainter possibility that he now has convinced himself of his previous positions and he'll stay anti-war.
But, as I said earlier, he is not 'fooling' anybody. It's good that he signed the letter along with Patricia and Ed and the others - and lets watch him and test him from now on.

by Watcher Wed Aug 01, 2007 13:44

I believe a complaint to Eamon Ryan about "subscription service" mobile phone rip offs got the exact same reply that his FF predesessor sent. "It's not my responsibilty"
And these companies are allowed to carry on robbing school childrens pocket money. It's not surprising when you see the names that are making fortunes from this racket. Watch the Galway races and you are sure to see one or two coming out of FF's hospitality tent.
That explains why FF never took any action, but what is the Greens excuse?

by Greenwatch Wed Aug 01, 2007 16:33

In addition to a U-turn on Shannon we now have the spectacle of the Greens playing economic maestros with their latest diversionary tactic. They say they will reap millions in extra taxes from our Oil and Gas resources.
They forget to mention that the tax increase is not applicable to the fields already in operation. Corrib being the prime example.

They are fast becoming exemplary students in the School of Fianna Fail

by awi member Wed Aug 01, 2007 16:53

What would get my goat would be if we see the Greens trying to play both sides of the fence. On the one hand, they are overseeing the Shannon military stopover; on the other, certain leading members continue to be vocally anti-war.

The Greens can't have it both ways. If the current party policy on Shannon can't be reversed, then self-respecting anti-war Greens should just get out of the party rather than provide a smokescreen for this farce.

by Jimmy O´T Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:25

Hi Michael Y

Is is not the case that Cllr O Brolchin is back in the radical camp becuse he was wasn´t chosen for the party seat in the Senate?

by MichaelY - iawm Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:02

Hi Jimmy,
I don't know the Cllr well enough to be able to answer your question with certainty. You may very well be right. However, my generic view of people, who decide to make politics their job and live off it, is that it matters little WHY they do things......what's important is the content of what is being done and the effect it has on the rest of us.

In this context, this a letter the iawm sent and got published in the IT today as a response to the letter by the 8 Greens.

Madam,

Heartening to read today's 'Letter to the Editor' by the 8 Green Party members raising the issue of Irish complicity in the invasion of Iraq and the mayhem and destruction caused by it. Our Movement also joins them in their congratulation of Archbishop John Neill for his courageous criticism of the provision of facilities in Shannon to the US military and the CIA.

The above contrast loudly with the deafening silence emanating from our political and business establishment. All the talk about 'supporting our US friends' sounds ever more hollow when 70% of the American people, and most Irish citizens, have turned decisively against the continuation of the war. Hardly anybody believes anymore either the US President or his generals when they assure us that "vistory is still possible"! More and more US soldiers, marines, veterans and the families of service members are either totally disillusioned, recognising that the war was based on lies, or are now compeltely opposed to the continuation of the war and occupation.

Finally, the military situation is worsening despite this so-called 'surge'. The number of Iraqi dead is about 3,000 each month and the number of US dead spiked in May and June 2007 to the second and third highest month since 2003. Every poll shows that the Iraqis themselves, be they Sunni, Shia,
Kurd, Christian or Moslem have also turned decisively against the occupation and the US military presence..

We fully endorse the statement made by the 8 Green Party members that the historical credibility of our people is at stake when we congratulate ourselves for endorsing and promoting peace at home while endorsing and supporting war and killing abroad.

Michael (Co-Chair of the iawm)

Is all the talk about us?

by michael x Thu Aug 02, 2007 12:30

MichaelY refers to "Our Movement" in his letter.

1. What 'movement'? Who does he think he's speaking for? He doesn't speak for me. The IAWM has no right to speak for anti-war activists other than their own few members.

2. What 'movement' again? The anti-war movement is in a shambles and, at this point, it's stretching things to talk of a milieu as a movement.

Anyhow, speak for the IAWM MichaelY, don't speak for a 'movement' that you have no right to represent.

by MichaelY - iawm Thu Aug 02, 2007 13:44

Thanks for the pertinent advice MichaelX.

Your view that the anti-war movement is "in a shambles" is, obviously, a dearly held personal view of yours....and you're welcome to it though give me, pls, "the right" to disagree.
My view, and that of the iawm that I am proud to be a member, is that there is a lot of anti-war activity at the moment - following the disappointment of the elections.
Over the last three weeks, there were anti-war events in Cork, in Tralee, a very successful anti-Airshow demo in Galway organised by the GAAW, 10 anti-war activists from Derry are presently in Lebanon with the people of Qana, about 40 of us picketed the Israeli Embassy last Monday re: 1 yesr since the destruction of Qana, there is ongoing pickets of superstores re: Israeli products, organised by the IPSC with iawm members present, another happening this afternoon.
Now, there are certain components of the larger anti-war movement that are having 'problems', that's true, but we are sure this is a temporary situation and they will be able to work things out soon. The shananigans of the Green party leadership confused the situation somewhat...that is also true.
The Irish Times letter of the 8 Green members was extremely welcome in this context - I would like to hear your views re:its content. And our response was outlining the situation as we see it. I would also like to hear your views re:the opinions and analysis stated. You focussed, from your angle, on one word, now lets discuss the rest of it if you care.
For the rest, as stated above, thank you for your contribution and your views will be taken fully on board.

by michael x Thu Aug 02, 2007 14:08

MichaelY has a habit of thinking he can waffle his way through things with bluster and nasty, concealed snipes (this time at the "larger anti-war movement", by which he obviously means those groups that aren't the IAWM).

Most of what you've written MichaelY is just bluster to avoid answering who you think you are to speak for the "movement". You tell us that the IAWM is thriving! What parallel dimension are you living in. How many active members have you at the moment? I could count them on one hand. You are co-chair of nothing? A general with no army who survives through press releases and letters to the Irish Times that contrive to give the impression that something stands behind you. The IAWM is a shell - even the steering committee (the last outpost) is in a mess.

A few actions, organised by two or three people, and sometimes in conjunction with other groups, are very worthy, but not the sign of thriving organisation. MichaelY now spends as much time as an IPSC activist (and no that isn't the same as the IAWM) while his co-chair, Richard Boyd Barrett, has effectively fucked off. Richard knows and accepts the sad state of the IAWM - do you really think he would have taken a back seat otherwise? In fact, in a post-election interview for the Socialist Worker, he admitted that the anti-war movement was in a poor state.

So, MichaelY, don't come all bullshitty with us about the wonderful IAWM. It scarcely exists these days. And don't think you have any right to speak for the movement - you don't no more than RBB or anyone else. It's a fragmented movement and the IAWM remains a small part of it, even smaller now that its chums in the Green Party are in Government.

by MichaelY - iawm Thu Aug 02, 2007 14:39

MichaelX

Your tirade and your anus-repressive language doesn't cut any ice with me. This is a thread about an important public letter written by a number of well experienced Green Party activists and the iawm's response to it. And any attempts to derail it woud be just that....an attempt of a very isolated person using Indymedia to give off black and blue heat. Puff puff.
If you read again at what I wrote, you will not find anywhere any notion of 'thriving'/ I pointed out to you a number of anti-war actions you were obviously unaware of, organised by a few people around the country....even you admit they were "worthy"!! Thank God, or Durutti, for small mercies.
The iawm will continue to be active where we can with those members who are prepared to move into 'worthy' actions.....with other organisations, such as the IPSC, or PANA, or Eirigi, where perspectives join and help each other. We will continue to be a thorn on the side of the establishment and try to mobilise as many people as we can. The use of Shannon must be stopped.

Personal comments re:Richard don't cut any ice either. His activity, the respect he enjoys in the community where he lives and works politically, are good enough answers for any self-styled political pundit - if that's what you are. Look at the mirror please.

Your advice "don't come all bullshitty with us" is finally returned straight back to you and your ilk [us???lol] with the utmost grace.

by michael x Thu Aug 02, 2007 14:53

Calm down there, MichaelY. I wouldn't want to be held responsible for inducing a heart attack. I've made my point, you've ignored it studiously. What's new? That's your preferred form of argumentation.

With regard to the Greens who signed the letter - good stuff but ultimately irrelevant if their party continues to allow the US military to use Shannon. I suggest those eight Greens have a decision to make about their political future. The Greens should be pandered to no more.

by MichaelY - iawm Thu Aug 02, 2007 15:26

Thanks for your consideration re: my health.

The only half-point you made so far that's worth considering is your last sentence: "With regard to the Greens who signed the letter - good stuff but ultimately irrelevant if their party continues to allow the US military to use Shannon. I suggest those eight Greens have a decision to make about their political future."
I don't agree with the first part. A statement at this juncture signed by Ed, Kristina and Patricia, all three of whom are very very respected and well known anti-war activists (I don't know the others so I can't comment), part of what I called earlier the larger anti-war movement in this country, is anything but "irrelevant". They're well capable of defending their corner so I won't talk on their behalf. But working with them, discussing things with them, incorporating them in plans for the future, is much more than what you, in your facile sectarian mode, call 'pandering'. And, yes, they have to make decisions about their future, I suppose they know that, don't you think? What's more interesting is what you think they should do.....pray tell.
There have been a couple of meetings called by 'dissident' Greens already. More on that soon I hope. Watch this space.

by Sharon . - Individual . Thu Aug 02, 2007 16:11

...to another !

Hi MichaelY !

"There have been a couple of meetings called by 'dissident' Greens already. More on that soon I hope. Watch this space."

There have been plenty of meetings between 'dissident' Greens and their colleagues since June 14th last . I know for a fact they have held discussions with other elected representatives from Fianna Fail , the Progressive Democrats and 'independents' .

It's no big secret ... !

Sharon.

by MichaelY - iawm Sat Aug 04, 2007 14:15

Following the initial publication of the letter signed by the 8 Greens, good to see the debate on Shannon and the war in Iraq continuing in the Irish Times. There have been a whole number of letters from people criticising the use of Shannon and opposing what is going on in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine. And one Tony Allwright supporting - he thinks, and I quote from today's IT "what the US and other coalition forces are doing in Iraq is a noble cause"!
What struck me though was a letter by Martin Long, Director of the Catholic Communications Office in Maynooth. Pricked, obviously, by the criticism that there has been " a deafening silence....by the Catholic Bishops on the Irish Government's complicty...", he writes to object :
His arguments:
(1)"At ther general meeting in June the Bishops called for prayers for Christians in Iraq and asked for a resolution of the conflict".
(2)"On July 1st Archbishop Brady led prayers for peace in Iraq...."
(3)"Pope John Paul II went to great lengths to prevent this war..."
(4) "A permanent end to conflict and war has been the central theme of Pope Benedict's World Peace Day messages".

Now, I cannot see any full or even half hearted condemnation of the Irish Government's complicity in this war. Or any criticism of what the Bush Administration and the Labour Party Government in the UK are doing - against the wishes of the absolute majoprity of their people. Generic wishful thinking for peace is just that....everybody who initiates a war, an invasion, a killing, criminal sanctions, argues they're doing it "for peace"! I am sure many of the more than 1 million US soldiers who passed through Shannon, and all those killed while there, may have been thinking they're going to Iraq and are fighting the people there to "promote peace"!
I believe that the Irish Catholic Church, and its leadership, owes us a fuller explanation of where they stand on this issue - far more than platitudes.

by Seán Ryan Sat Aug 04, 2007 15:15

Hear hear Michael.

I think the Church needs to explain itself too. More than this, I think it needs to understand itself and understand that the masses are not the stupid and inarticulate neanderthals that they take them for.

The Pope has called for peace many times. But has never done anything substantive to achieve it. Calling for peace without setting out a concrete grounding behind this call is akin to writing a letter to Santa (Dear Madam?). When one calls for peace in the present context, one must also say that this war is unjust and that the perpetrators are immoral and criminals. Otherwise it is just a cheap piece of propaganda and fence-sitting and in both the long and the short term, it is an act that facilitates and enables the ongoing criminality.

If the Church were to have the same regard for illegal wars and global criminality as they do for condoms, this war would have been stopped long ago and the Church would have some purchase with regard to their holier than thou attitude.

As it is, the few from within the Church who do come out and do the right thing, are the exception rather than the rule. As it is, it seems to me, that the Church will wait for mass public opinion and action (especially in the US) to lead they way, and when the criminals are dethroned, the Church will claim credit and that that was what they were calling for all along. Very similar to their record throughout history.

by MichaelY - iawm Sat Aug 04, 2007 15:45

Hi Sean,

Good to see our minds and positions meet in some important threads. I agree with you. Though it was instructive to read a letter by Fr Declan Deane from All Saints Parish, Hayward in Cal . in Friday's IT. Among other very valid points, he says " ...Americans are usually aghast when I tell them that Ireland - despite its international image and recent experience...of violence....is currently lending a hand to the lunatic adventurism of President Bush."
How straight forward and what a contrast to the wishy-washy platitudes emanating from the Catholic Communications Office in Maynooth.
Take care my good friend. and lets support our courageous Green friends who, rumour has it, will face a lot of hassle from the new 'pragmatic' leadership!

by paul o toole Sun Aug 05, 2007 14:31

By accepting a collective party position in government with Fianna Fail and failing to include the ongoing issue of Shannon Warport in their programme for Government, the Greens have in effect, supported the government . By endorsing the misuse of shannon as a military base to carry on a genocide and other warcrimes in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Green Party as a whole are now themselves participating in these warcrimes.
Even those Green members who say they 'oppose' the use of shannon airport to kill kids in Iraq, also are now part of the military disaster that is unfolding in Iraq by remaining in the party. Genocide will be Blair, Bushes, Berties and now the Green Partys legasy also.

But on the issue, fair play to the COI for having the balls to open its mouth, pity it diddnt open it sooner....four years sooner. The Catholic Church I believe is also a participant in the warcrimes in Iraq by effectively endorsing the invasion through its silence after the invasion and asking us to pray for the victims in Iraq BEFORE we killed them...so thoughtful of them. They supported Franco, Moussilini, Hitler and now Bush/blair/Bertie...wonder what Jesus would think of them?

by anon Thu Aug 09, 2007 14:35

There was good letter in the Times yesterday pointing out that as opposed to what Martin Long claimed the catholic bishops conference were very hard to get in touch which to speak out against the war but now they might be losing money a bishop suddenly has something to say

The voluntary body, which numbers Irish bishops among its patrons, said business and tourism in the region will be hit by the decision, with the consequent loss of jobs and opportunities.

The Council for the West was set up by the bishops of the region and is a voluntary, independent, non-political body that monitors and reports on the socio-economic state of the west and acts as a lobby group promoting the development of the region.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2007/0807/bre...3.htm

by bj Thu Aug 09, 2007 20:44

Many people in the Shannon region supported the U.S. military stopover out of fear of losing jobs and money; now that aer lingus has pulled out that is exactly what is going to happen. Is this justice - poetic or otherwise?

by Watcher Fri Aug 10, 2007 08:05

If there was any doubt that the Greens have merged to become just another FF mudguard, surely that was dispelled last night on Prime Time by the performance of Senator DeBurcha defending McCreevy's hatchet job on the Freedom of Information Act. The art of speaking while saying nothing has been learned very quickly.
It is one thing standing by and allowing FF/PD to privatise health and everything else, to continue to allow Shannon to be used as a military base etc etc., but to start to appear on TV as spokeperson for such a government and defending this stuff is a uturn of mythical porportions.

by Insider Sat Aug 11, 2007 02:10

The FOI Act, we all know, has been watered down; this is to protect the machinations of government agencies, their secrecy, their ways of operating. It is a deliberate move, well thought out. As was pointed out on RTE last evening, the introduction of charges for FOI info is designed to make application to the Act less appealing to ordinary people. I am not the only one, surely, who has received info under the Act - after much pushing and shoving - where half a page was blacked out, whole phrases were blacked out: the thing looked like an X-file. What all of this means, of course, is to Hell with you Ordinary Person, we are giving you nothing. As always, the major decisions in this country are taken in secret, to private agendae, and bugger your rights.

by safety first Sun Aug 12, 2007 15:44

Over 250 US troops remained over night in hotels throughout County Clare after their aircraft was forced to make an emergency landing at Shannon Airport yesterday afternoon.

The World Airways flight MD-11 jet was travelling from the US state of Maine to Leipzig in Germany when the pilot reported a problem with one of the plane's three engines.